By Robin G. Jordan
The Provincial Council took less than a day to go through the proposed set of canons and to adopt them. The session initially got off to a bad start with the Council jumping around the canons instead of taking them one by one. Throughout the session the work of the Council was interrupted by various speakers--foreign dignatories and missioners. As Baby Blue noted in her live commentary, those who raised questions were bishops and other clergy. The lay members of the Council were silent.
The canons that will be presented to the Provincial Assembly for ratification on Wednesday are a “rush job.” Bishop Duncan was opposed to the session extending into the next day and pushed for the completion of the session by the end of the day.
I have studied the canons since they were first made public on April 3, 2009 and adopted with amendments on April 25, 2009. They are riddled with all kinds of problems, none of which could have possibly been adequately addressed in the time that the Council devoted to them.
For a number of proposals for their revision and an explanation of why each proposed change is necessary, I refer readers to “Proposed Amendments to the Canons of the Anglican Church in North America” on the Internet at: http://theheritageanglicannetwork.blogspot.com/2009/06/proposed-amendments-to-canons-of.html A similar set of proposals for the constitution are on the Internet at: http://theheritageanglicannetwork.blogspot.com/2009/06/proposed-amendments-to-constitution-of.html
The fast pace at which the constitution and the canons were pushed through the Provincial Council is going to come back and haunt the leadership of the ACNA. Many concerns were not even touched upon, much less properly dealt with. The problems are not going to disappear.
The question must be asked: why the hurry? Would not the ACNA benefit from a solid foundation and a solid framework instead of the shaky ones with which the constitution and canons in their present form provide the church?
When the excitement of the inaugural Provincial Assembly has ended, a lot of people are going to realize that the Governance Task Force and the Provincial Council did not do as good a job as they had originally thought. It may be two or three years or longer down the road and after a number of churches have pulled out of the ACNA but that time will come. Would not it better to put in place a more equitable constitution and canons from the outset and prevent all the strife and unhappiness that the existing documents are going to produce?
2 comments:
Robin,
I the systems world where I work (when I get a job) a common phrase is "time box." The time box is what you are in when you set a date for completion without accurately assessing the work needed.
So, if one commits to some African primates that a province will be extant and ready to be 'recognized' by a date certain; if one has told some financial supporters that a church will be there before TEC has its GC, then if one summons a convention with a pre-set agenda and schedule; then the product is going to be whatever can be done.
We have another saying, Good, Cheap, Fast are all available, pick any two.
I do not have a horse in this race. I think the results of your careful reading of the now approved canons is correct. And there will be problems down the road.
FWIW
jimB
One of my proposals was what I call an "Interrim Document of Governance". It would have consisted of a brief generic constitution like that of Southern Cone and a brief set of generic canons also like those of Southern Cone. The Provincial Council and the Provincial Assembly would have adopted this instrument of governance in place of the constitution and canons. It would have given them more time to work on the ACNA foundational documents.
The canons could have been developed title by title, section by section. If you look at the canons of the Anglican Church of Australia, they are like a series of legislative acts. The canons of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand & Polynesia are similar. Putting them together in this way would have allowed them to do a much better job.
Post a Comment